Rosenberg v. Wilson

115 S.E. 7, 154 Ga. 625, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 432
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided December 15, 1922·No. No. 3053·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Hill, J.

1. On conflicting evidence the trial judge did not abuse bis discretion in refusing a temporary injunction and in dissolving the order appointing a temporary receiver.

2. A final decree can not be entered in any case at an interlocutory hearing. Accordingly, so much of the interlocutory order as refused an interlocutory injunction and dissolved the- former order appointing a temporary receiver is affirmed; and so much of the order as decrees the payment of costs to the receiver and the issuing of execution therefor, being final, is reversed.

Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part.

All the Justices concur. Colley & Colley, for plaintiff. C. E. Sutton, for defendants.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Rosenberg v. Wilson, 115 S.E. 7, 154 Ga. 625, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 432 (Ga. 1922).

115 S.E. 7 (Rosenberg v. Wilson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kight v. Gilliard
105 S.E.2d 333 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1958)
Booker v. Scott
104 S.E.2d 416 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1958)
Kniepkamp v. Richards
16 S.E.2d 24 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1941)
Holeman v. Federal Land Bank of Columbia
200 S.E. 149 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)
Justice v. Warner
173 S.E. 703 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1934)
Rosenberg v. Wilson
128 S.E. 178 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1925)